Forums » Off-topic discussion » Learn me budget mountain bikes 1 2 3 4

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 11:33 a.m. DILYSI Dave SuperDork

  What I have in mind is $200 - $400 for something that isn't a raging POS. Suspension would probably be cool, but I suspect that I don't want any suspension I could get on my budget. Flat pedals. The idea is something that I could haul up to the local MTB trails and not be pissed at, but cheap enough that I don't feel like a tard if/when it collects cobwebs. Also - it needs to be pretty robust, as my 320# ass is going to be on it, and I'm not exactly gentle on bikes. Is that a realistic shopping list?

  Links to ATL Craigslist with good options are also appreciated.

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 12:27 p.m. The_Jed Reader

  320 lbs and you drive a Civic!?

  Looks more closely at your avatar pic

  That is a big ass forearm. How tall are you?

  The tires on my bike are load rated to 90 kilos, you may need some more robust rubber too.

  I am the Yeti.

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 12:58 p.m. 02Pilot Reader

  I'd be looking for an early 90s or thereabouts steel frame full rigid. Try to find something with good tire clearance in the seatstays and fork; that will allow you to run wider tires, which will help with comfort and weight distribution. Trek and Giant are probably the most common, but that era was filled with similar bikes from a whole bunch of manufacturers. Shouldn't cost you more than $200 at most (I don't know what the bike market is like down by you; it's ridiculously inflated up here in NY, and you can still find bikes like this for less than $200).

  You'll probably be dealing with 21-speed, or maybe 24-speed, drivetrains. Some of those early MTBs had pretty high gearing, but that's easily solved with a lower range cassette and/or crankset. You could upgrade both for less than $100 with a new chain, but you may not need to, depending on your trails. For $50 or so you can put on some new tires; at your weight I'd go no smaller than 2.25", more like 2.4" if the frame has the clearance.

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 1:18 p.m. EastCoastMojo SuperDork

  

  Rockhopper 19" $200
  

  

  GT Tequesta 21" $300
  

  Steel is going to be a good choice. Stay away from suspension.

  I'm a chick

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 1:21 p.m. akamcfly Reader

  These weren't bad in their day - kind of an entry level "good" bike.

  These were good too Resident expert ECM agrees I see.

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 1:24 p.m. EastCoastMojo SuperDork

  LOL Two votes for the Rockhopper

  I'm a chick

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 1:26 p.m. akamcfly Reader

  EastCoastMojo wrote: LOL Two votes for the Rockhopper

  JINX

  I didn't see the GT - they had bitchin paint jobs back in the early 90s. I always wanted an orange Karakorum. Their stems were 2 miles long though.

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 1:28 p.m. Keith SuperDork

  I like Specialized. Rode them for years and never damaged one, while my Fischer aluminum bike had to get patched up a few times. My city bike is a Stumpjumper that I picked up for about $200 and my previous trail bike was also a rigid Stumpjumper.

  The Rockhopper is the next step down on the food chain. I suspect the price difference between rigid Stumpjumpers and Rockhoppers is pretty much gone by now, so I'd go with the higher-end model.

  Square left in 50 caution ocean!

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 1:55 p.m. bastomatic Dork

  Rigid 90s Specialized Stumpjumper would be my food of choice. I have a really nice Suspension fork but I think it'd be a little to light for your, ahem, frame.

  Really though, for a cheap frame I'd want simple, steel, and rigid. Heck, you may be able to get a rigid 29er from a few seasons ago at that price. I just sold my 2010 Novara 29er with nice components for $650.

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 2:24 p.m. 92CelicaHalfTrac SuperDork

  Used gary fisher, highest model you can find.

  Kona Stuff would be a nice choice, too.

  SCAVENGE THE SEA FLOOR FOR NUTRIENTS

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 2:26 p.m. Woody SuperDork

  akamcfly wrote: I didn't see the GT - they had bitchin paint jobs back in the early 90s. I always wanted an orange Karakorum. Their stems were 2 miles long though.

  A friend of mine had one of those. It seemed insanely heavy.

  This is the sort of thing that people who like this sort of thing will really like.

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 2:45 p.m. nderwater SuperDork

  I second the Gary Fisher recommend. I have a rigid steel bike and a steelie with a suspension fork... skip the suspension unless you plan to do a lot of technical stuff. It's dead weight 3/4 of the time and sucks power on uphill climbs.

  Auto photo blog: motomania.tumblr.com | Rants & Ramblings: tractioninc.tumblr.com | Vintage photos: motohistory.tumblr.com

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 2:55 p.m. Woody SuperDork

  Here's a low end Cannondale for $245 that's not too far from you. Large (22") aluminum frame, nice and light.

  http://atlanta.craigslist.org/nat/bik/2751396516.html

  This is the sort of thing that people who like this sort of thing will really like.

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 3:04 p.m. akamcfly Reader

  Woody wrote:

  akamcfly wrote: I didn't see the GT - they had bitchin paint jobs back in the early 90s. I always wanted an orange Karakorum. Their stems were 2 miles long though.

  A friend of mine had one of those. It seemed insanely heavy.

  I heard they were tanks too - but I absolutely loved the paint.

  

  Shuuuuuuut uuuuuuuup - it was the 90s.

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 3:07 p.m. Woody SuperDork

  Try to avoid buying a used suspension bike. There are a bunch of ways that they can go bad and each one is different. Be especially wary of really clean used suspension bikes. Be sure to check under the boots. Water is the enemy.

  This is the sort of thing that people who like this sort of thing will really like.

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 3:22 p.m. DILYSI Dave SuperDork

  The_Jed wrote: 320 lbs and you drive a Civic!? *Looks more closely at your avatar pic* That is a big ass forearm. How tall are you? The tires on my bike are load rated to 90 kilos, you may need some more robust rubber too.

  Fat guy in a little car....

  That said, I'm big even when I'm not fat. 250# would be "normal" on me. I was under 7% body fat at 225#. Big arms, big chest, etc. I'm 6'1", but I only have a 30# inseam. Tall torso.

  One reason I think I'd like at least a suspended fork is that the last two times I've stopped riding, have been to arm injuries. Messed up my wrist once, and tore a labrum in my shoulder a different time. Since my shoulder is weaker than it was, it seems like a sprung fork would be more forgiving.

  I've got a buddy who says that it's not worth having a bike without disc brakes. Thoughts?

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 3:27 p.m. Hasbro Dork

  I think a 29er would be the most comfortable and disperse the weight well.

  Add Lightness

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 3:27 p.m. mndsm SuperDork

  Another vote for the Specialized. I've had a couple Rockhoppers now, and love them. SUPER strong. if you go to the higher end of your budget, you might find a early 2000's RH with a decent front fork, my old one had a RockShox Judy on it current one has an Answer Manitou- bought that one new in 2005. It'd probably go well below 500 to find a comparable one to my current bike.

  Go fast or go broke.

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 3:37 p.m. EastCoastMojo SuperDork

  Even a decent fork is not going to be set up for someone 300#+, and older forks may not have stiffer springs available now to upgrade. I would try to stay away from suspension.

  I'm a chick

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 3:52 p.m. ClemSparks SuperDork

  DILYSI Dave wrote: I've got a buddy who says that it's not worth having a bike without disc brakes. Thoughts?

  I got into mountain biking recently (last summer was my first time riding). I picked up a used, old Trek with a big frame. It's an old one like an 8 or something...lol...let me run and check. It's an 820. It's actually a little tall for me at 6' or 6'-1". I don't recall the size.

  ANYWAY...more to the point of my reply. Being new to mountain biking myself...disk brakes aren't necessary (obviously...I don't have them) but man...do I sure get a hand workout. It's a real challenge for me holding onto the bike, steering, AND slowing down all at the same time. A good challenge...but more than I bargained for to begin with.

  I think Disk brakes would allow you to spend a little more time holding on and not so much squeezing the levers. On the other hand...I'm afraid I'd lock them up easy. There's a lot going on while mountain biking (not so much like riding along gravel trails...which is more what I've become accustomed to).

  Clem

  Yeah, well...sometimes even when it IS broken I don't fix it.

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 3:55 p.m. 92CelicaHalfTrac SuperDork

  Disc brakes are awesome.

  Not 100% necessary, but if you're going to get into the hairier high speed stuff, i would spring for them if you can budget for them.

  Their wet performance is far superior as well, which is the main reason i would personally go for them.

  There's mechanical rim brakes, hydraulic rim brakes (don't think these are that common anymore), mechanical disc, and hydraulic disc.

  The happy medium in my opinion is mechanical disc.

  SCAVENGE THE SEA FLOOR FOR NUTRIENTS

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 4:43 p.m. 02Pilot Reader

  I've had significant wrist discomfort even on suspension setups. Good grips make a huge difference in ride comfort, especially in the wrists. I love my Ergon GC-2s.

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 5:24 p.m. akamcfly Reader

  92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: Disc brakes are awesome. Not 100% necessary, but if you're going to get into the hairier high speed stuff, i would spring for them if you can budget for them. Their wet performance is far superior as well, which is the main reason i would personally go for them. There's mechanical rim brakes, hydraulic rim brakes (don't think these are that common anymore), mechanical disc, and hydraulic disc. The happy medium in my opinion is mechanical disc.

  Be wary that an older bike may not allow a disc brake retrofit. The frame and fork need caliper mounting bosses (actually caliper adapter mounting bosses) and the hubs need to be drilled or splined and threaded (damn shimano centerlock) for rotors.

  V-brakes and aluminum rims work better than you may expect.

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 5:28 p.m. mad_machine SuperDork

  good grips.. and "bull bars" on the ends to allow you to shift your position and grip when things start to ache.

  I picked up a nice Trek 9700 OCLV carbon fibre framed Mountain bike with some Manitou suspended front forks.. for $500 a couple of years ago.. been a great bike ever since.

  Upgrades have been a better seat, "bull bars" a rear rack, and better tyres more suited to tramac and gravel (no mountains in the southern end of NJ)

  Be careful of your words, for someone will agree with them. Be careful of your conduct, for someone will imitate it. -Leih Tsu

• 

  Jan. 14, 2012 5:30 p.m. Keith SuperDork

  Given your weight, I'm thinking the improved stopping power of discs might be worth it. I was never able to get my old cantilevers to work as well as my current discs.

  A Gary Fisher is really a Trek. The older Fishers are different bikes. I used to have one - awesome bike for the time.

  Square left in 50 caution ocean!

1 2 3 4  

You'll need to log in to post.